Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court

Supreme Court Modifies Compensation Rate in Land Acquisition Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment delivered on April 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of India modified the compensation rate awarded in a land acquisition case. The case involved the acquisition of lands for the establishment of an IT Park in Kozhikode.

The High Court of Kerala had previously determined the compensation at Rs. 1,35,000/- per cent, considering the negotiated price of Rs. 1,00,000/- per cent and granting a further 35% rise. However, the appellants challenged this decision, arguing that the lands in question were garden lands with road access, situated in a prime location near the IT Park.

The appellants also relied on a sale exemplar indicating a higher price for nearby land. The High Court had dismissed this evidence, stating that the sale exemplar pertained to commercial property and was therefore not relevant.

After considering the arguments, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to consider the negotiated price as a relevant factor in determining the compensation. However, the Court found that granting a 35% rise to the negotiated price was on the lower side, considering the location of the lands.

Therefore, the Supreme Court modified the compensation rate to Rs. 1,60,000/- per cent, providing a fair and just compensation to the landowners. The acquiring body was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with the Reference Court, and the original claimants were entitled to statutory benefits and interest.

DATE OF DECISION: April 10, 2023

Rajalakshmi vs The Special Tahsildar (LA) Koyilandy & Another

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/10-Apr-2023-RAJALAKSHMI-Vs-TEHSILDAR.pdf"]

Latest Legal News